Texas Dairy Review (Stephenville, Tex.), Vol. 1, No. 6, Ed. 1 Thursday, August 6, 1992 Page: 4 of 29
This newspaper is part of the collection entitled: Texas Digital Newspaper Program and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the UNT Libraries.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
PACE 4 TEXAS DABT DREW
A Nutritionist’s View
Understanding feed analysis and how it applies
FEED ANALYSIS {PART 1)
Dairymen and scientist alike
have been having feed and feed
ingredients analyzed for many
years. They ■'have done this in an
attempt to determine the quality
of the ingredients they are feeding
their livestock and so that more
accurate formulations can be
made. Unfortunately, some of the
information that is reported on a
feed analysis sheet may have little
meaning to the dairy producer.
This is the first of a series of
articles that will attempt to
explain what some of the analysis
information you redeve means
and how it can be applied to a
feeding situation.
PROXIMATE ANALYSIS
The first reported scheme of
analyzing feeds was devised over a
hundred years ago at a German
experiment station. The founders
of this method named it The
.Proximate Analysis Scheme.
Although many of their methods
are still used today, some people
seem to think that a more appro*
priate name may have been The
Approximate Analysis Scheme.
This play on words comes from
the fact that many of the analysis
are approximations by today’s
standards.
Their scheme consisted of six
components. They are moisture,
crude protein, crude fit, crude
fiber, ash and nitrogen free ex-
tract Modern technology and
research has refined these Pro-
ximate Analysis components.
■ Moisture: As it was originally
intended, this category was to
represent that portion of a feeds
weight which was water. A sample
of feed is weighed and then placed
in an oven until all the moisture
is driven off. The sample is
reweighed and the weight loss
represents the moisure contained
in the original sample. This
weight loss is expressed as a
percentage of the original weight
of the sample. Even today this is
still the primaiy method of deter-
mining a feed’s moisture content
The main problem with this
By R.E. Tolbert, Ph.D.
method is in determining mois- no moisture. Table 1 illustrates an
ture in fermented products such example of a typical feed analysis
as silages. This is because the sheet,
volatile components in silage, the nble oapages\
t»tkui P^^ted»T^owerr ton You W*B notice tlu,t when «ch
tation, evaporate at lower tern-
peratures than water. Titus the °oiumn s Primate Analysis com-
vahte we end up with represents P°nents ■* added to*ethcr-
bot^ moisture and other wlatiles. toml m excludes dry mat*
This can lead to a value that since it is not one of the
one to three percentage points oomponents.
UDC IO mice pcivc.. B ^ unde„Un<]ing „f ^ djf.
An area that is confining to fcrcnt ^ ** ******* are
most people is that feed andysi. ^ <»» P™»‘ misunder-
are reported op as fed, dry matter standk8* J™' ingredient
and air dry basis. In order to suPPlkra- An example would be
differentiate between them, we *e nitumtion where a dairyman
must first have an understanding **^2
of the relationship between mois-
that he is told is 21% crude
ture and dry matter. The dry Protcin- He has the hay analyzed
matter percentage that is reported at a loca* laboratory and the
S5S SSsSS
is 70% moisture then it is 30% that something is wrong. But that
dry matter (ie: 100% - 70% - "lay not be the case, since hay
30%) . with 183% crude protein and
Tbedr,tolleranalysboffeeds nK.fc.urco,™*>M basb
is reported as if the feed contains B ,he same ^ l^al 18
protein on a dry matter basis. The
conversion of values from one
basis to another is relatively sim-
ple. To convert from an as fed
basis to a dry matter basis, divide
the as fed analysis by the dry
matter fraction. Example: 100% •
13% moisture ■ 87% dry matter.
The fraction of 87% dry matter is
.87 therefore:
18.3% crude protein (as fed
basis) - 21.03% crude protein .87
(dry matter basis)
To convert from a dry matter
basis to an as fed basis multiply
the dry matter analysis value by
the dry matter fraction.
Example: 21.03% crude protein X
.87 - 18.3% crude protein (dry
matter basis) (as fed basis)
The air dry values convert all
analysis to a 10% moisure basis.
Either air dry values or dry matter
values can be used to compare
like feeds to one another.
Oudt Protein: This fraction of
the Proximate Analysis Scheme is
still widely utilized today. The
See Feed on Pnge S
R.E. Tolbert, Ph.D., PA.S.
. Independent
Dairy Nutritional
Consultant
(817)566-7031
First National Bank
of Dublin
"Daily loans are a big part of
our business. ”
82S N. Patrick
Dublin, TX.
Stephenville Dublin
817-965-5000 817-445-4400
Member of PD1C _
Bramlett Implement, Inc.
Hwy. 377 South Stephenville, Texas
(817)9684118
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Matching Search Results
View one place within this issue that match your search.Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Webb, Sherry. Texas Dairy Review (Stephenville, Tex.), Vol. 1, No. 6, Ed. 1 Thursday, August 6, 1992, newspaper, August 6, 1992; Stephenville, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth768184/m1/4/?q=%22thurber+%22~1&rotate=270: accessed July 16, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; .